Chocola taking over Club for Growth.

[Keystone Phil]

I figured I'd report this so the "THANKS 4 THE HELP, CHRIS!" comments from forum Dems/whining from Don can finish early. 

http://www.clubforgrowth.org/2009/04/chocola_elected_president_of_t.php

[Brittain33]

[Keystone Phil]

LOL

Yeah, the guy has a great name.

[Lunar]

Well, he couldn't figure out how to hold onto a Republican-leaning district in Indiana [before Obama did anything...we're talking 2006] despite raising over three million dollars, so I'm fully supportive of him.

[Lunar]

oh and he's even more socially conservative that Toomey, I think.

-Chocola was a cosponsor of the Federal Marriage Amendment in 2003 and voted for that Amendment when it came to the floor in 2004. He again was a cosponsor of the Marriage Protection Amendment in 2006 (H.J. Res. 88) and voted for the amendment on July 18, 2006.
-He voted in 2005 for an amendment to the Constitution preventing the desecration of the American flag.
-Voted for the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act in July 2006, which restricts credit card companies from processing payment towards Internet gambling companies.
-Voted for the Pledge Protection Act in mid-July 2006, which would prevent federal courts from ruling on cases involving the Pledge of Allegiance.
-Voted against overriding President George W. Bush's veto of the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act in July 2006. The bill would have modified restrictions on embryonic stem cell research and allowed for federal funding of the research.

[Bleeding heart conservative, HTMLdon]

oh and he's even more socially conservative that Toomey.

Oh don't worry about that, the Club for "Growth" is about "Economic Conservatism".

[Brittain33]

Talking Points Memo focused on him for months in 2006 because he refused to state his position on Social Security privatization that year after openly advocating it in better times. Either that or he outright lied about it, I forget. He was a chief "bamboozler" for denying his past stories and trying to avoid having this issue dog him in the election. This could complicate his role at the CfG, which I assume takes a strong line on privatizing Social Security.

[Lunar]

He's advocated for complete privatization eventually, but denied it in his competitive race.  Otherwise he just supported the Bush plan, I don't see a problem with this at CfG

[Rowan]

Will this group please become irrelevant soon. Pretty please.

[Smash255]

Will this group please become irrelevant soon. Pretty please.

From how you seem to align yourself ideologically I thought you would be a big fan of a group that thinks anyone to the left of Dubya is a commie.

[bullmoose88]

oh and he's even more socially conservative that Toomey.

Oh don't worry about that, the Club for "Growth" is about "Economic Conservatism".

We have a winner.

[Lunar]

As long as they spend at least $600,000 backing Sharron Angle for NV Senate in 2010, like they did when she lost the race for NV-02, I'll be amused.  Maybe they can help Frank Kratovil keep his seat too?

[Bacon King]

Sorry to sound all loaded and hackish with the following question, but has the Club for Growth ever, well, done anything right?

[Lunar]

Sorry to sound all loaded and hackish with the following question, but has the Club for Growth ever, well, done anything right?

They got a more conservative candidate elected against the establishment's choice of the more moderate candidate, despite claims that he could never win.  But that was in Oklahoma.

[Keystone Phil]

Sorry to sound all loaded and hackish with the following question, but has the Club for Growth ever, well, done anything right?

They got a more conservative candidate elected against the establishment's choice of the more moderate candidate, despite claims that he could never win.  But that was in Oklahoma.

Yeah. I remember when "pragmatic" Don still insisted to go with Humphreys over Coburn (and Murkowski over Miller in Alaska and Beasley over DeMint - another race I'm pretty sure the Club for Growth was involved in and won) even though he's constantly arguing about electability and how the Club for Growth is always working against us in that area.

[Landslide Lyndon]

I'm not sure that electing someone like Coburn in Oklahoma is something to write home about.

[Rowan]

Will this group please become irrelevant soon. Pretty please.

From how you seem to align yourself ideologically I thought you would be a big fan of a group that thinks anyone to the left of Dubya is a commie.

I like to win elections. This group does the opposite.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Sorry to sound all loaded and hackish with the following question, but has the Club for Growth ever, well, done anything right?

They got a more conservative candidate elected against the establishment's choice of the more moderate candidate, despite claims that he could never win.  But that was in Oklahoma.

Yeah. I remember when "pragmatic" Don still insisted to go with Humphreys over Coburn (and Murkowski over Miller in Alaska and Beasley over DeMint - another race I'm pretty sure the Club for Growth was involved in and won) even though he's constantly arguing about electability and how the Club for Growth is always working against us in that area.

You would've won all  those seats regardless. Now note all the seats that the CfG has lost you guys.

[Keystone Phil]

Sorry to sound all loaded and hackish with the following question, but has the Club for Growth ever, well, done anything right?

They got a more conservative candidate elected against the establishment's choice of the more moderate candidate, despite claims that he could never win.  But that was in Oklahoma.

Yeah. I remember when "pragmatic" Don still insisted to go with Humphreys over Coburn (and Murkowski over Miller in Alaska and Beasley over DeMint - another race I'm pretty sure the Club for Growth was involved in and won) even though he's constantly arguing about electability and how the Club for Growth is always working against us in that area.

You would've won all  those seats regardless. Now note all the seats that the CfG has lost you guys.

Not necessarily in Oklahoma and Alaska was (and South Carolina would have been) much closer. That's the point. We had a chance at an easier road to victory (which Don claims to be all about) and certain people wanted to throw up roadblocks.

We've been over "all the seats the Club for Growth 'lost'" for us. It's exaggerated.